TBD Meeting (3154-19)

SAN FRANCISCO – It took about 50 MitraClip cases for operator outcomes to start improving, and outcomes were still improving at 200 cases, in a study reviewing 14,923 MitraClip procedures in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry from November 2013 to March 2018.

“These findings demonstrate the key role of operator experience in optimizing outcomes” of transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with MitraClip (Abbott Structural), said investigators, led by Adnan Chhatriwalla, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Saint Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, Mo.

“New operators may experience a ‘learning curve’ irrespective of the overall site experience or experience of other members of the Heart Team,” they wrote in the study (JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.014).

“As TMVr becomes more prevalent in the U.S., it may be prudent for less experienced operators to be cognizant of where they sit on the ‘learning curve’ and to pay particular attention to case selection in their early experience, considering that more complex patients may be referred to more experienced centers for treatment when prudent,” they noted.

“The overall duration of the learning curve may exceed 200 cases,” Dr. Chhatriwalla said at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting in a presentation that coincided with the study’s publication.

“This is a more complex procedure than [transcatheter aortic valve replacement], and the volume/outcome relationship is stronger. We are seeing issues that are related to early experience in low-volume programs. Public reporting so consumers can determine how many cases a center does is going to be critical,” said cardiothoracic surgeon Michael Mack, MD, director of the cardiovascular service line at a health system in Dallas, after the talk. He was one of the authors of the study.

The investigators compared outcomes among 549 operators who had done 1-25 MitraClip cases, 230 who had performed 26-50 cases, and 116 who had performed 50 or more.

Optimal procedural success – defined as less than or equal to 1+ residual mitral regurgitation (MR) without death or cardiac surgery – was 63.9%, 68.4%, and 75.1%, respectively, across the three groups (P less than .001). The “acceptable” procedural success rate – less than or equal to 2+ residual MR without death or cardiac surgery – was 91.4%, 92.4%, and 93.8% (P less than .001). No interaction was observed between the mechanism of mitral valve regurgitation and procedural outcomes.

Procedure time decreased as operators gained experience (145, 118, and 99 minutes), and atrial septal defect closure rates increased (0.9%, 1.4%, and 2.2%, respectively).

Composite complications rates also fell (9.7%, 8.1%, and 7.3%), driven mostly by less frequent cardiac perforation (1.0%, 1.1%, and 0.4%) and less frequent blood transfusion (9.6%, 8.6%, and 6.5%). The results were statistically significant.

“Adjusted learning curves for procedural success were visually evident after approximately 50 cases, and continued improvement in clinical outcomes was observed for the entire case sequence up to 200 cases,” the investigators wrote. The improvements could not be attributed to patient selection alone, they said.

More experienced operators were more likely to use more than one clip per case, and more frequently treated central and medial, as opposed to lateral, pathology. Operators with more than 50 cases were less likely to treat patients who had preexisting mitral stenosis or required home oxygen, and experienced operators were more likely to perform the procedure in unstable patients, when appropriate. The proportion of patients with functional MR – as opposed to degenerative disease – increased with increasing experience.

There were no statistically significant differences across the groups in stroke rates (P = .26), single-leaflet device attachments (P = .11), trans-septal complications (P = .25), urgent cardiac surgery (P = .42), or in-hospital mortality (P = .55).

Patients were a median of 81 years old, and most were white; 93% had 3+ or 4+ MR at baseline, and 86.3% had degenerative mitral disease. Two-thirds had atrial fibrillation/flutter.

The work was supported by the ACC/STS TVT Registry. Dr. Chhatriwalla is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic, and is a speaker for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Mack has served as an investigator for Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott, and as a study chair for Medtronic. Other investigators reported similar industry disclosures.

The meeting is sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Chhatriwalla A et. al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.014.

SAN FRANCISCO – It took about 50 MitraClip cases for operator outcomes to start improving, and outcomes were still improving at 200 cases, in a study reviewing 14,923 MitraClip procedures in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry from November 2013 to March 2018.

“These findings demonstrate the key role of operator experience in optimizing outcomes” of transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with MitraClip (Abbott Structural), said investigators, led by Adnan Chhatriwalla, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Saint Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, Mo.

“New operators may experience a ‘learning curve’ irrespective of the overall site experience or experience of other members of the Heart Team,” they wrote in the study (JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.014).

“As TMVr becomes more prevalent in the U.S., it may be prudent for less experienced operators to be cognizant of where they sit on the ‘learning curve’ and to pay particular attention to case selection in their early experience, considering that more complex patients may be referred to more experienced centers for treatment when prudent,” they noted.

“The overall duration of the learning curve may exceed 200 cases,” Dr. Chhatriwalla said at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting in a presentation that coincided with the study’s publication.

“This is a more complex procedure than [transcatheter aortic valve replacement], and the volume/outcome relationship is stronger. We are seeing issues that are related to early experience in low-volume programs. Public reporting so consumers can determine how many cases a center does is going to be critical,” said cardiothoracic surgeon Michael Mack, MD, director of the cardiovascular service line at a health system in Dallas, after the talk. He was one of the authors of the study.

The investigators compared outcomes among 549 operators who had done 1-25 MitraClip cases, 230 who had performed 26-50 cases, and 116 who had performed 50 or more.

Optimal procedural success – defined as less than or equal to 1+ residual mitral regurgitation (MR) without death or cardiac surgery – was 63.9%, 68.4%, and 75.1%, respectively, across the three groups (P less than .001). The “acceptable” procedural success rate – less than or equal to 2+ residual MR without death or cardiac surgery – was 91.4%, 92.4%, and 93.8% (P less than .001). No interaction was observed between the mechanism of mitral valve regurgitation and procedural outcomes.

Procedure time decreased as operators gained experience (145, 118, and 99 minutes), and atrial septal defect closure rates increased (0.9%, 1.4%, and 2.2%, respectively).

Composite complications rates also fell (9.7%, 8.1%, and 7.3%), driven mostly by less frequent cardiac perforation (1.0%, 1.1%, and 0.4%) and less frequent blood transfusion (9.6%, 8.6%, and 6.5%). The results were statistically significant.

“Adjusted learning curves for procedural success were visually evident after approximately 50 cases, and continued improvement in clinical outcomes was observed for the entire case sequence up to 200 cases,” the investigators wrote. The improvements could not be attributed to patient selection alone, they said.

More experienced operators were more likely to use more than one clip per case, and more frequently treated central and medial, as opposed to lateral, pathology. Operators with more than 50 cases were less likely to treat patients who had preexisting mitral stenosis or required home oxygen, and experienced operators were more likely to perform the procedure in unstable patients, when appropriate. The proportion of patients with functional MR – as opposed to degenerative disease – increased with increasing experience.

There were no statistically significant differences across the groups in stroke rates (P = .26), single-leaflet device attachments (P = .11), trans-septal complications (P = .25), urgent cardiac surgery (P = .42), or in-hospital mortality (P = .55).

Patients were a median of 81 years old, and most were white; 93% had 3+ or 4+ MR at baseline, and 86.3% had degenerative mitral disease. Two-thirds had atrial fibrillation/flutter.

The work was supported by the ACC/STS TVT Registry. Dr. Chhatriwalla is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic, and is a speaker for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Mack has served as an investigator for Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott, and as a study chair for Medtronic. Other investigators reported similar industry disclosures.

The meeting is sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Chhatriwalla A et. al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.014.

SAN FRANCISCO – It took about 50 MitraClip cases for operator outcomes to start improving, and outcomes were still improving at 200 cases, in a study reviewing 14,923 MitraClip procedures in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry from November 2013 to March 2018.

“These findings demonstrate the key role of operator experience in optimizing outcomes” of transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with MitraClip (Abbott Structural), said investigators, led by Adnan Chhatriwalla, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Saint Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, Mo.

“New operators may experience a ‘learning curve’ irrespective of the overall site experience or experience of other members of the Heart Team,” they wrote in the study (JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.014).

“As TMVr becomes more prevalent in the U.S., it may be prudent for less experienced operators to be cognizant of where they sit on the ‘learning curve’ and to pay particular attention to case selection in their early experience, considering that more complex patients may be referred to more experienced centers for treatment when prudent,” they noted.

“The overall duration of the learning curve may exceed 200 cases,” Dr. Chhatriwalla said at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting in a presentation that coincided with the study’s publication.

“This is a more complex procedure than [transcatheter aortic valve replacement], and the volume/outcome relationship is stronger. We are seeing issues that are related to early experience in low-volume programs. Public reporting so consumers can determine how many cases a center does is going to be critical,” said cardiothoracic surgeon Michael Mack, MD, director of the cardiovascular service line at a health system in Dallas, after the talk. He was one of the authors of the study.

The investigators compared outcomes among 549 operators who had done 1-25 MitraClip cases, 230 who had performed 26-50 cases, and 116 who had performed 50 or more.

Optimal procedural success – defined as less than or equal to 1+ residual mitral regurgitation (MR) without death or cardiac surgery – was 63.9%, 68.4%, and 75.1%, respectively, across the three groups (P less than .001). The “acceptable” procedural success rate – less than or equal to 2+ residual MR without death or cardiac surgery – was 91.4%, 92.4%, and 93.8% (P less than .001). No interaction was observed between the mechanism of mitral valve regurgitation and procedural outcomes.

Procedure time decreased as operators gained experience (145, 118, and 99 minutes), and atrial septal defect closure rates increased (0.9%, 1.4%, and 2.2%, respectively).

Composite complications rates also fell (9.7%, 8.1%, and 7.3%), driven mostly by less frequent cardiac perforation (1.0%, 1.1%, and 0.4%) and less frequent blood transfusion (9.6%, 8.6%, and 6.5%). The results were statistically significant.

“Adjusted learning curves for procedural success were visually evident after approximately 50 cases, and continued improvement in clinical outcomes was observed for the entire case sequence up to 200 cases,” the investigators wrote. The improvements could not be attributed to patient selection alone, they said.

More experienced operators were more likely to use more than one clip per case, and more frequently treated central and medial, as opposed to lateral, pathology. Operators with more than 50 cases were less likely to treat patients who had preexisting mitral stenosis or required home oxygen, and experienced operators were more likely to perform the procedure in unstable patients, when appropriate. The proportion of patients with functional MR – as opposed to degenerative disease – increased with increasing experience.

There were no statistically significant differences across the groups in stroke rates (P = .26), single-leaflet device attachments (P = .11), trans-septal complications (P = .25), urgent cardiac surgery (P = .42), or in-hospital mortality (P = .55).

Patients were a median of 81 years old, and most were white; 93% had 3+ or 4+ MR at baseline, and 86.3% had degenerative mitral disease. Two-thirds had atrial fibrillation/flutter.

The work was supported by the ACC/STS TVT Registry. Dr. Chhatriwalla is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic, and is a speaker for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Mack has served as an investigator for Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott, and as a study chair for Medtronic. Other investigators reported similar industry disclosures.

The meeting is sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Chhatriwalla A et. al. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.09.014.

SAN FRANCISCO – After 3 months of ticagrelor (Brilinta) plus aspirin following cardiac stenting, stopping the aspirin but continuing the ticagrelor resulted in less bleeding with no increase in ischemic events in a randomized trial with more than 7,000 drug-eluting stent patients at high risk for both.

“This was a superior therapy” to staying on both drugs, the more usual approach, said lead investigator Roxana Mehran, MD, director of interventional cardiovascular research and clinical trials at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.

“We can’t say this is for all comers, but for patients whose physician felt comfortable putting them on aspirin and ticagrelor,” who tolerated it well for the first 3 months, and who had clinical and angiographic indications of risk, “I think these patients can be peeled away” from aspirin, she said in a presentation at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting that coincided with publication of the trial, dubbed TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor with Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention).

Interventional cardiologists have long sought the sweet spot for dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after stenting; the idea is to maximize thrombosis prevention while minimizing bleeding risk. The trial supports the trend in recent years towards shorter DAPT. Often, however, it’s the P2Y12 inhibitor – ticagrelor, clopidogrel (Plavix), or prasugrel (Effient) – that goes first, not the aspirin.

Responding to an audience question about why the trial didn’t include an aspirin monotherapy arm, Dr. Mehran said that aspirin alone wouldn’t have been sufficient in high-risk patients “in whom you have almost 70% acute coronary syndrome.” She added that her team has data showing that aspirin itself doesn’t have much effect on blood thrombogenicity.

The 7,119 patients in TWILIGHT were on ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily and aspirin 81-100 mg daily for 3 months, then evenly randomized to continued treatment or ticagrelor plus an aspirin placebo for a year.

Subjects had to have at least one clinical and angiographic finding that put them at high risk for bleeding or an ischemic event, such as chronic kidney disease, acute coronary syndrome, diabetes, or a bifurcated target lesion treated with two stents.

One year after randomization, 4% in the ticagrelor monotherapy group versus 7.1% in the ticagrelor plus aspirin arm reached the primary end point, actionable (type 2), severe (type 3), or fatal (type 5) bleeding on the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium scale (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.45 - 0.68, P less than .001).

The incidence of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was 3.9% in both groups (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25; P less than .001 for noninferiority).

There were more ischemic strokes in the ticagrelor monotherapy arm (0.5% versus 0.2%). All-cause mortality (1.3% versus 1%) and stent thrombosis (0.6% versus 0.4%) were more frequent in the ticagrelor/aspirin group, but the differences were not statistically significant.

The two groups were well balanced. The mean age was 65 years, 23.8% of the patients were female, 37% had diabetes, and 65% had percutaneous coronary intervention for an acute coronary syndrome. Almost two-thirds had multivessel disease. Mean stent length was about 40 mm. The trial excluded patients with prior strokes.

Almost 2,000 patients originally enrolled in the trial never made it to randomization because they had a major bleeding or ischemic event in the 3-month run up, or dyspnea or some other reaction to ticagrelor.

The recent STOPDAPT-2 trial had a similar outcome – less bleeding with no increase in ischemic events – with clopidogrel monotherapy after a month-long run in of dual therapy with aspirin, versus continued treatment with both, in patients at low risk for ischemic events after stenting (JAMA. 2019 Jun 25;321[24]:2414-27).

Another recent study, GLOBAL LEADERS, concluded that 1 month of DAPT followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months was not superior to 12 months of DAPT followed by a year of aspirin. There was a numerical advantage for solo ticagrelor on death, myocardial infarction, and bleeding, but it did not reach statistical significance (Lancet. 2018 Sep 15;392[10151]:940-9).

The work was funded by ticagrelor’s maker, AstraZeneca. Dr. Mehran reported consulting and other relationships with Abbott, Janssen, and other companies.

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Mehran A et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908419.

SAN FRANCISCO – After 3 months of ticagrelor (Brilinta) plus aspirin following cardiac stenting, stopping the aspirin but continuing the ticagrelor resulted in less bleeding with no increase in ischemic events in a randomized trial with more than 7,000 drug-eluting stent patients at high risk for both.

“This was a superior therapy” to staying on both drugs, the more usual approach, said lead investigator Roxana Mehran, MD, director of interventional cardiovascular research and clinical trials at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.

“We can’t say this is for all comers, but for patients whose physician felt comfortable putting them on aspirin and ticagrelor,” who tolerated it well for the first 3 months, and who had clinical and angiographic indications of risk, “I think these patients can be peeled away” from aspirin, she said in a presentation at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting that coincided with publication of the trial, dubbed TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor with Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention).

Interventional cardiologists have long sought the sweet spot for dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after stenting; the idea is to maximize thrombosis prevention while minimizing bleeding risk. The trial supports the trend in recent years towards shorter DAPT. Often, however, it’s the P2Y12 inhibitor – ticagrelor, clopidogrel (Plavix), or prasugrel (Effient) – that goes first, not the aspirin.

Responding to an audience question about why the trial didn’t include an aspirin monotherapy arm, Dr. Mehran said that aspirin alone wouldn’t have been sufficient in high-risk patients “in whom you have almost 70% acute coronary syndrome.” She added that her team has data showing that aspirin itself doesn’t have much effect on blood thrombogenicity.

The 7,119 patients in TWILIGHT were on ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily and aspirin 81-100 mg daily for 3 months, then evenly randomized to continued treatment or ticagrelor plus an aspirin placebo for a year.

Subjects had to have at least one clinical and angiographic finding that put them at high risk for bleeding or an ischemic event, such as chronic kidney disease, acute coronary syndrome, diabetes, or a bifurcated target lesion treated with two stents.

One year after randomization, 4% in the ticagrelor monotherapy group versus 7.1% in the ticagrelor plus aspirin arm reached the primary end point, actionable (type 2), severe (type 3), or fatal (type 5) bleeding on the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium scale (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.45 - 0.68, P less than .001).

The incidence of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was 3.9% in both groups (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25; P less than .001 for noninferiority).

There were more ischemic strokes in the ticagrelor monotherapy arm (0.5% versus 0.2%). All-cause mortality (1.3% versus 1%) and stent thrombosis (0.6% versus 0.4%) were more frequent in the ticagrelor/aspirin group, but the differences were not statistically significant.

The two groups were well balanced. The mean age was 65 years, 23.8% of the patients were female, 37% had diabetes, and 65% had percutaneous coronary intervention for an acute coronary syndrome. Almost two-thirds had multivessel disease. Mean stent length was about 40 mm. The trial excluded patients with prior strokes.

Almost 2,000 patients originally enrolled in the trial never made it to randomization because they had a major bleeding or ischemic event in the 3-month run up, or dyspnea or some other reaction to ticagrelor.

The recent STOPDAPT-2 trial had a similar outcome – less bleeding with no increase in ischemic events – with clopidogrel monotherapy after a month-long run in of dual therapy with aspirin, versus continued treatment with both, in patients at low risk for ischemic events after stenting (JAMA. 2019 Jun 25;321[24]:2414-27).

Another recent study, GLOBAL LEADERS, concluded that 1 month of DAPT followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months was not superior to 12 months of DAPT followed by a year of aspirin. There was a numerical advantage for solo ticagrelor on death, myocardial infarction, and bleeding, but it did not reach statistical significance (Lancet. 2018 Sep 15;392[10151]:940-9).

The work was funded by ticagrelor’s maker, AstraZeneca. Dr. Mehran reported consulting and other relationships with Abbott, Janssen, and other companies.

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Mehran A et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908419.

SAN FRANCISCO – After 3 months of ticagrelor (Brilinta) plus aspirin following cardiac stenting, stopping the aspirin but continuing the ticagrelor resulted in less bleeding with no increase in ischemic events in a randomized trial with more than 7,000 drug-eluting stent patients at high risk for both.

“This was a superior therapy” to staying on both drugs, the more usual approach, said lead investigator Roxana Mehran, MD, director of interventional cardiovascular research and clinical trials at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.

“We can’t say this is for all comers, but for patients whose physician felt comfortable putting them on aspirin and ticagrelor,” who tolerated it well for the first 3 months, and who had clinical and angiographic indications of risk, “I think these patients can be peeled away” from aspirin, she said in a presentation at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting that coincided with publication of the trial, dubbed TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor with Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention).

Interventional cardiologists have long sought the sweet spot for dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after stenting; the idea is to maximize thrombosis prevention while minimizing bleeding risk. The trial supports the trend in recent years towards shorter DAPT. Often, however, it’s the P2Y12 inhibitor – ticagrelor, clopidogrel (Plavix), or prasugrel (Effient) – that goes first, not the aspirin.

Responding to an audience question about why the trial didn’t include an aspirin monotherapy arm, Dr. Mehran said that aspirin alone wouldn’t have been sufficient in high-risk patients “in whom you have almost 70% acute coronary syndrome.” She added that her team has data showing that aspirin itself doesn’t have much effect on blood thrombogenicity.

The 7,119 patients in TWILIGHT were on ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily and aspirin 81-100 mg daily for 3 months, then evenly randomized to continued treatment or ticagrelor plus an aspirin placebo for a year.

Subjects had to have at least one clinical and angiographic finding that put them at high risk for bleeding or an ischemic event, such as chronic kidney disease, acute coronary syndrome, diabetes, or a bifurcated target lesion treated with two stents.

One year after randomization, 4% in the ticagrelor monotherapy group versus 7.1% in the ticagrelor plus aspirin arm reached the primary end point, actionable (type 2), severe (type 3), or fatal (type 5) bleeding on the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium scale (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.45 - 0.68, P less than .001).

The incidence of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was 3.9% in both groups (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25; P less than .001 for noninferiority).

There were more ischemic strokes in the ticagrelor monotherapy arm (0.5% versus 0.2%). All-cause mortality (1.3% versus 1%) and stent thrombosis (0.6% versus 0.4%) were more frequent in the ticagrelor/aspirin group, but the differences were not statistically significant.

The two groups were well balanced. The mean age was 65 years, 23.8% of the patients were female, 37% had diabetes, and 65% had percutaneous coronary intervention for an acute coronary syndrome. Almost two-thirds had multivessel disease. Mean stent length was about 40 mm. The trial excluded patients with prior strokes.

Almost 2,000 patients originally enrolled in the trial never made it to randomization because they had a major bleeding or ischemic event in the 3-month run up, or dyspnea or some other reaction to ticagrelor.

The recent STOPDAPT-2 trial had a similar outcome – less bleeding with no increase in ischemic events – with clopidogrel monotherapy after a month-long run in of dual therapy with aspirin, versus continued treatment with both, in patients at low risk for ischemic events after stenting (JAMA. 2019 Jun 25;321[24]:2414-27).

Another recent study, GLOBAL LEADERS, concluded that 1 month of DAPT followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months was not superior to 12 months of DAPT followed by a year of aspirin. There was a numerical advantage for solo ticagrelor on death, myocardial infarction, and bleeding, but it did not reach statistical significance (Lancet. 2018 Sep 15;392[10151]:940-9).

The work was funded by ticagrelor’s maker, AstraZeneca. Dr. Mehran reported consulting and other relationships with Abbott, Janssen, and other companies.

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Mehran A et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908419.

SAN FRANCISCO – The prevalence of hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT) and reduced leaflet motion among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with SAPIEN 3 or surgery was 10% at 30 days and increased to 24% at 1 year, results from a PARTNER 3 substudy demonstrated.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

However, the lack of a clear association with serious clinical events such as death, MI, and stroke “does not justify the routine prophylactic use of anticoagulation [following TAVR] in all patients,” lead study investigator Raj R. Makkar, MD, said during a press briefing at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting.

“Subclinical leaflet thrombosis characterized by hypoattenuated leaflet thickening and reduced leaflet motion has been frequently observed in transcatheter and surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves,” said Dr. Makkar, director of the interventional cardiology division, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Thrombus on bioprosthetic valves can present as a spectrum: HALT with relatively normal leaflet motion, HALT with reduced leaflet motion but normal gradients, and clinical valve thrombosis with elevated gradients.”

The primary objective of the current Food and Drug Administration–mandated study, known as the PARTNER 3 Low-Risk Computed Tomography Sub-study, was to evaluate HALT and reduced leaflet motion in terms of differences in transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves among patients enrolled in the randomized PARTNER 3 cohort, to understand the natural history of HALT and reduced leaflet motion in the absence of anticoagulation, and to understand its impact on valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. Patients underwent specialized serial CTs at 30 days and at 1 year post TAVR or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). All scans were analyzed by a CT core lab blinded to patient information or time of the scans, and the treating investigators were blinded to the results of the 30-day and 1-year CT scans. A clinical events committee adjudicated key clinical events.

Dr. Makkar reported outcomes from 408 patients: 213 who underwent TAVR and 195 who underwent surgery. There were 348 evaluable serial CT scans at 30 days and 312 at 1 year. The incidence of HALT at 30 days was 13.3% in the TAVR group and 5% in the surgery group, a difference that reached statistical significance (P = .03). At 1 year, however, the difference was not significant (27.5% vs. 20.2%, respectively; P = .19). In the overall cohort, he said, the incidence of HALT was 10% at 30 days and increased to 24% at 1 year.

The researchers also found that HALT was dynamic and spontaneously resolved in 56% of patients in the absence of anticoagulation at 30 days, while new HALT appeared in 21% of patients at 1 year.

“In terms of its impact on valve gradient, the impact was minimal,” Dr. Makkar said. “There was an increase of 1-2 mm Hg in patients who had HALT and in patients who had reduced leaflet motion.”

As for impact on clinical outcomes, the researchers observed no deaths or any myocardial infarction at any time point in patients who had HALT. “There were four cases of valve thrombosis, three of which occurred in patients who had HALT,” Dr. Makkar said at the meeting, sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. “One stroke occurred in each group. TIA [transient ischemic attack] occurred in 1 patient out of 35 in the HALT group and 3 out of 311 in the no-HALT group. There was one case of retinal artery embolism in each group.”

In a pooled analysis of clinical events, he and his colleagues observed a numerical increase in death, stroke, TIA, and thrombotic events in patients who had HALT at 30 days, compared with those who did not (8.6% vs. 2.9%, respectively), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .11). “However, given the low total number of events, the data are inconclusive and only hypothesis generating,” he said. “A longer-term follow-up and [a] larger data set will further clarify the impact on clinical outcomes.”

Dr. Makkar emphasized that routine post–TAVR/SAVR CT scans outside of research protocols are not indicated. “CTs should be prompted by increased gradients or thromboembolic events,” he said.

One of the discussants at the briefing, Michael J. Mack, MD, chair of the cardiovascular service line at Baylor Scott and White Health in Dallas and primary author of the PARTNER 3 study, said that prior to the substudy results, “I’ve always thought that the incidence of valve thrombosis would be higher with TAVR than with surgery. So the fact that it was higher at 30 days didn’t surprise me. One of the reasons is that you lose the backwashing effect by changing flow dynamics in the aortic route. What did surprise me is the percent that resolved without anticoagulation.”

He added, “The impact of all this is that we are not justified recommending routine anticoagulation [after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement surgery]. I think it does call into question the guidelines for surgical valves, because we did that based on smaller observational studies. Now that we have routine surveillance of surgical valves, I think it calls into question the class IIa recommendation for 3 months of anticoagulation. It’s what we’ve always done, and we’ll probably stop doing it on the basis of this. The other shoe that hasn’t dropped is its effect on long-term structural valve deterioration. I do think that early HALT does explain premature structural valve deterioration.”

The trial was sponsored by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Makkar disclosed that he is a consultant for and has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Mack is a consultant to Gore and an investigator for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SAN FRANCISCO – The prevalence of hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT) and reduced leaflet motion among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with SAPIEN 3 or surgery was 10% at 30 days and increased to 24% at 1 year, results from a PARTNER 3 substudy demonstrated.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

However, the lack of a clear association with serious clinical events such as death, MI, and stroke “does not justify the routine prophylactic use of anticoagulation [following TAVR] in all patients,” lead study investigator Raj R. Makkar, MD, said during a press briefing at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting.

“Subclinical leaflet thrombosis characterized by hypoattenuated leaflet thickening and reduced leaflet motion has been frequently observed in transcatheter and surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves,” said Dr. Makkar, director of the interventional cardiology division, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Thrombus on bioprosthetic valves can present as a spectrum: HALT with relatively normal leaflet motion, HALT with reduced leaflet motion but normal gradients, and clinical valve thrombosis with elevated gradients.”

The primary objective of the current Food and Drug Administration–mandated study, known as the PARTNER 3 Low-Risk Computed Tomography Sub-study, was to evaluate HALT and reduced leaflet motion in terms of differences in transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves among patients enrolled in the randomized PARTNER 3 cohort, to understand the natural history of HALT and reduced leaflet motion in the absence of anticoagulation, and to understand its impact on valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. Patients underwent specialized serial CTs at 30 days and at 1 year post TAVR or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). All scans were analyzed by a CT core lab blinded to patient information or time of the scans, and the treating investigators were blinded to the results of the 30-day and 1-year CT scans. A clinical events committee adjudicated key clinical events.

Dr. Makkar reported outcomes from 408 patients: 213 who underwent TAVR and 195 who underwent surgery. There were 348 evaluable serial CT scans at 30 days and 312 at 1 year. The incidence of HALT at 30 days was 13.3% in the TAVR group and 5% in the surgery group, a difference that reached statistical significance (P = .03). At 1 year, however, the difference was not significant (27.5% vs. 20.2%, respectively; P = .19). In the overall cohort, he said, the incidence of HALT was 10% at 30 days and increased to 24% at 1 year.

The researchers also found that HALT was dynamic and spontaneously resolved in 56% of patients in the absence of anticoagulation at 30 days, while new HALT appeared in 21% of patients at 1 year.

“In terms of its impact on valve gradient, the impact was minimal,” Dr. Makkar said. “There was an increase of 1-2 mm Hg in patients who had HALT and in patients who had reduced leaflet motion.”

As for impact on clinical outcomes, the researchers observed no deaths or any myocardial infarction at any time point in patients who had HALT. “There were four cases of valve thrombosis, three of which occurred in patients who had HALT,” Dr. Makkar said at the meeting, sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. “One stroke occurred in each group. TIA [transient ischemic attack] occurred in 1 patient out of 35 in the HALT group and 3 out of 311 in the no-HALT group. There was one case of retinal artery embolism in each group.”

In a pooled analysis of clinical events, he and his colleagues observed a numerical increase in death, stroke, TIA, and thrombotic events in patients who had HALT at 30 days, compared with those who did not (8.6% vs. 2.9%, respectively), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .11). “However, given the low total number of events, the data are inconclusive and only hypothesis generating,” he said. “A longer-term follow-up and [a] larger data set will further clarify the impact on clinical outcomes.”

Dr. Makkar emphasized that routine post–TAVR/SAVR CT scans outside of research protocols are not indicated. “CTs should be prompted by increased gradients or thromboembolic events,” he said.

One of the discussants at the briefing, Michael J. Mack, MD, chair of the cardiovascular service line at Baylor Scott and White Health in Dallas and primary author of the PARTNER 3 study, said that prior to the substudy results, “I’ve always thought that the incidence of valve thrombosis would be higher with TAVR than with surgery. So the fact that it was higher at 30 days didn’t surprise me. One of the reasons is that you lose the backwashing effect by changing flow dynamics in the aortic route. What did surprise me is the percent that resolved without anticoagulation.”

He added, “The impact of all this is that we are not justified recommending routine anticoagulation [after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement surgery]. I think it does call into question the guidelines for surgical valves, because we did that based on smaller observational studies. Now that we have routine surveillance of surgical valves, I think it calls into question the class IIa recommendation for 3 months of anticoagulation. It’s what we’ve always done, and we’ll probably stop doing it on the basis of this. The other shoe that hasn’t dropped is its effect on long-term structural valve deterioration. I do think that early HALT does explain premature structural valve deterioration.”

The trial was sponsored by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Makkar disclosed that he is a consultant for and has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Mack is a consultant to Gore and an investigator for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SAN FRANCISCO – The prevalence of hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT) and reduced leaflet motion among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with SAPIEN 3 or surgery was 10% at 30 days and increased to 24% at 1 year, results from a PARTNER 3 substudy demonstrated.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

However, the lack of a clear association with serious clinical events such as death, MI, and stroke “does not justify the routine prophylactic use of anticoagulation [following TAVR] in all patients,” lead study investigator Raj R. Makkar, MD, said during a press briefing at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting.

“Subclinical leaflet thrombosis characterized by hypoattenuated leaflet thickening and reduced leaflet motion has been frequently observed in transcatheter and surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves,” said Dr. Makkar, director of the interventional cardiology division, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Thrombus on bioprosthetic valves can present as a spectrum: HALT with relatively normal leaflet motion, HALT with reduced leaflet motion but normal gradients, and clinical valve thrombosis with elevated gradients.”

The primary objective of the current Food and Drug Administration–mandated study, known as the PARTNER 3 Low-Risk Computed Tomography Sub-study, was to evaluate HALT and reduced leaflet motion in terms of differences in transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves among patients enrolled in the randomized PARTNER 3 cohort, to understand the natural history of HALT and reduced leaflet motion in the absence of anticoagulation, and to understand its impact on valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. Patients underwent specialized serial CTs at 30 days and at 1 year post TAVR or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). All scans were analyzed by a CT core lab blinded to patient information or time of the scans, and the treating investigators were blinded to the results of the 30-day and 1-year CT scans. A clinical events committee adjudicated key clinical events.

Dr. Makkar reported outcomes from 408 patients: 213 who underwent TAVR and 195 who underwent surgery. There were 348 evaluable serial CT scans at 30 days and 312 at 1 year. The incidence of HALT at 30 days was 13.3% in the TAVR group and 5% in the surgery group, a difference that reached statistical significance (P = .03). At 1 year, however, the difference was not significant (27.5% vs. 20.2%, respectively; P = .19). In the overall cohort, he said, the incidence of HALT was 10% at 30 days and increased to 24% at 1 year.

The researchers also found that HALT was dynamic and spontaneously resolved in 56% of patients in the absence of anticoagulation at 30 days, while new HALT appeared in 21% of patients at 1 year.

“In terms of its impact on valve gradient, the impact was minimal,” Dr. Makkar said. “There was an increase of 1-2 mm Hg in patients who had HALT and in patients who had reduced leaflet motion.”

As for impact on clinical outcomes, the researchers observed no deaths or any myocardial infarction at any time point in patients who had HALT. “There were four cases of valve thrombosis, three of which occurred in patients who had HALT,” Dr. Makkar said at the meeting, sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. “One stroke occurred in each group. TIA [transient ischemic attack] occurred in 1 patient out of 35 in the HALT group and 3 out of 311 in the no-HALT group. There was one case of retinal artery embolism in each group.”

In a pooled analysis of clinical events, he and his colleagues observed a numerical increase in death, stroke, TIA, and thrombotic events in patients who had HALT at 30 days, compared with those who did not (8.6% vs. 2.9%, respectively), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .11). “However, given the low total number of events, the data are inconclusive and only hypothesis generating,” he said. “A longer-term follow-up and [a] larger data set will further clarify the impact on clinical outcomes.”

Dr. Makkar emphasized that routine post–TAVR/SAVR CT scans outside of research protocols are not indicated. “CTs should be prompted by increased gradients or thromboembolic events,” he said.

One of the discussants at the briefing, Michael J. Mack, MD, chair of the cardiovascular service line at Baylor Scott and White Health in Dallas and primary author of the PARTNER 3 study, said that prior to the substudy results, “I’ve always thought that the incidence of valve thrombosis would be higher with TAVR than with surgery. So the fact that it was higher at 30 days didn’t surprise me. One of the reasons is that you lose the backwashing effect by changing flow dynamics in the aortic route. What did surprise me is the percent that resolved without anticoagulation.”

He added, “The impact of all this is that we are not justified recommending routine anticoagulation [after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement surgery]. I think it does call into question the guidelines for surgical valves, because we did that based on smaller observational studies. Now that we have routine surveillance of surgical valves, I think it calls into question the class IIa recommendation for 3 months of anticoagulation. It’s what we’ve always done, and we’ll probably stop doing it on the basis of this. The other shoe that hasn’t dropped is its effect on long-term structural valve deterioration. I do think that early HALT does explain premature structural valve deterioration.”

The trial was sponsored by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Makkar disclosed that he is a consultant for and has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Mack is a consultant to Gore and an investigator for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SAN FRANCISCO – A postmarket analysis of the coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) system validated the safety and utility of the procedure first described in the Disrupt CAD I study.

“We now have an efficient technology to treat calcium that is safe to use, simple to learn, and able to achieve 100% success in delivering stents, with low final residual stenosis (7.8%),” Carlo Di Mario, MD, said in an interview in advance of the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting. “This was accomplished with a low rate of complications.”

Developed by Shockwave Medical, coronary IVL is an innovative lesion preparation tool designed to fracture challenging calcium using sonic pressure waves in order to facilitate stent delivery, deployment, and optimal expansion. In a feasibility study known as DISRUPT CAD I, Dr. Di Mario, director of structural interventional cardiology at Careggi University Hospital in Florence, Italy, and his colleagues performed the procedure in 60 patients (Circulation 2019;139:834-6). Clinical success, defined as residual stenosis of less than 50% post PCI with no evidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), was 95%, while device success, defined as successful delivery and IVL treatment at target lesion, reached 98.3%.

In an effort to ensure that results of DISRUPT CAD 1 were generalizable to a broader population, Dr. Di Mario and his colleagues enrolled 120 subjects at 15 sites in nine European countries into DISRUPT CAD II, a postmarket, single-arm study. They underwent vessel preparation for stent implantation with IVL, and the primary endpoint was in-hospital MACE, defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. The researchers also performed an optical coherence tomography (OCT) substudy to evaluate the mechanism of action of IVL and to quantify coronary artery calcium characteristics and calcium plaque fracture.

The mean age of the 120 patients was 72 years, 78% were male, 80% had hypertension, 72% had hyperlipidemia, 32% had diabetes, and 65% had class I or II angina. Most of the patients (94%) had severe calcification, with a mean lesion length of about 26 mm. The lesions were concentric in 70% of cases, and 30% had side-branch involvement.

Dr. Di Mario and his associates reported that IVL was delivered successfully in all cases. It also delivered stents successfully in all cases, with a high acute luminal gain (a mean of 1.7 mm²), and low residual stenosis (7.8%). The primary endpoint occurred in 5.8% of patients, consisting of seven non–Q-wave myocardial infarctions. The IVL mechanism of action was shown to be intraplaque calcium fracture, which occurred in about 80% of lesions analyzed by OCT.

“Based on my previous experience with IVL, I was confident that it could modify the calcium, but the results of the OCT substudy of the Disrupt CAD II utilizing OCT to evaluate the mechanism of action was clearly more positive than expected,” said Dr. Di Mario, who was a coprincipal investigator for the trial. “It demonstrated that IVL creates visible calcium fractures in the majority of cases and confirmed that full stent expansion secondary to the circumferential calcium modification is achievable, despite that nearly all the patients (94%) had severe coronary artery calcification. We know from previous work that full stent expansion is required to minimize complications and improve clinical outcomes, which was not always achievable before IVL.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it lacked a concurrent control group, “but it was run very carefully with complete monitoring of events and core lab and CEC [clinical endpoint committee] adjudication,” he said. “Also, the study was used to confirm short-term safety, and as such, did not include long term follow-up.”

In an interview at the meeting, Ajay J. Kirtane, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, called the findings “reassuring,” but said that he looks forward to results from the trial of the system currently under way in the United States known as the DISRUPT CAD III IDE Study. “The technology is accessible to many physicians because it’s a balloon-based technology,” he said. “Yet in terms of performance, we need to not only evaluate short-term outcomes, we need to see long-term outcomes as well, to make sure there are no untoward effects.”

Shockwave C² Coronary IVL catheters are commercially available for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease in Europe and other select countries; in the United States they are limited to investigational use within the DISRUPT CAD III IDE Study.

At the meeting, Ziad A. Ali, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Columbia University/New York–Presbyterian Hospital, presented results from Disrupt CAD II, and the content was published online at the time of presentation. The meeting was sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. Dr. Di Mario disclosed that Shockwave Medical provided a grant for the study to Careggi University Hospital. Dr. Ali reported having personal equity and fees from Shockwave Medical, as well as grants from other companies outside the scope of the study.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Di Mario C et al. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 25 doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008434.

SAN FRANCISCO – A postmarket analysis of the coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) system validated the safety and utility of the procedure first described in the Disrupt CAD I study.

“We now have an efficient technology to treat calcium that is safe to use, simple to learn, and able to achieve 100% success in delivering stents, with low final residual stenosis (7.8%),” Carlo Di Mario, MD, said in an interview in advance of the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting. “This was accomplished with a low rate of complications.”

Developed by Shockwave Medical, coronary IVL is an innovative lesion preparation tool designed to fracture challenging calcium using sonic pressure waves in order to facilitate stent delivery, deployment, and optimal expansion. In a feasibility study known as DISRUPT CAD I, Dr. Di Mario, director of structural interventional cardiology at Careggi University Hospital in Florence, Italy, and his colleagues performed the procedure in 60 patients (Circulation 2019;139:834-6). Clinical success, defined as residual stenosis of less than 50% post PCI with no evidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), was 95%, while device success, defined as successful delivery and IVL treatment at target lesion, reached 98.3%.

In an effort to ensure that results of DISRUPT CAD 1 were generalizable to a broader population, Dr. Di Mario and his colleagues enrolled 120 subjects at 15 sites in nine European countries into DISRUPT CAD II, a postmarket, single-arm study. They underwent vessel preparation for stent implantation with IVL, and the primary endpoint was in-hospital MACE, defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. The researchers also performed an optical coherence tomography (OCT) substudy to evaluate the mechanism of action of IVL and to quantify coronary artery calcium characteristics and calcium plaque fracture.

The mean age of the 120 patients was 72 years, 78% were male, 80% had hypertension, 72% had hyperlipidemia, 32% had diabetes, and 65% had class I or II angina. Most of the patients (94%) had severe calcification, with a mean lesion length of about 26 mm. The lesions were concentric in 70% of cases, and 30% had side-branch involvement.

Dr. Di Mario and his associates reported that IVL was delivered successfully in all cases. It also delivered stents successfully in all cases, with a high acute luminal gain (a mean of 1.7 mm²), and low residual stenosis (7.8%). The primary endpoint occurred in 5.8% of patients, consisting of seven non–Q-wave myocardial infarctions. The IVL mechanism of action was shown to be intraplaque calcium fracture, which occurred in about 80% of lesions analyzed by OCT.

“Based on my previous experience with IVL, I was confident that it could modify the calcium, but the results of the OCT substudy of the Disrupt CAD II utilizing OCT to evaluate the mechanism of action was clearly more positive than expected,” said Dr. Di Mario, who was a coprincipal investigator for the trial. “It demonstrated that IVL creates visible calcium fractures in the majority of cases and confirmed that full stent expansion secondary to the circumferential calcium modification is achievable, despite that nearly all the patients (94%) had severe coronary artery calcification. We know from previous work that full stent expansion is required to minimize complications and improve clinical outcomes, which was not always achievable before IVL.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it lacked a concurrent control group, “but it was run very carefully with complete monitoring of events and core lab and CEC [clinical endpoint committee] adjudication,” he said. “Also, the study was used to confirm short-term safety, and as such, did not include long term follow-up.”

In an interview at the meeting, Ajay J. Kirtane, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, called the findings “reassuring,” but said that he looks forward to results from the trial of the system currently under way in the United States known as the DISRUPT CAD III IDE Study. “The technology is accessible to many physicians because it’s a balloon-based technology,” he said. “Yet in terms of performance, we need to not only evaluate short-term outcomes, we need to see long-term outcomes as well, to make sure there are no untoward effects.”

Shockwave C² Coronary IVL catheters are commercially available for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease in Europe and other select countries; in the United States they are limited to investigational use within the DISRUPT CAD III IDE Study.

At the meeting, Ziad A. Ali, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Columbia University/New York–Presbyterian Hospital, presented results from Disrupt CAD II, and the content was published online at the time of presentation. The meeting was sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. Dr. Di Mario disclosed that Shockwave Medical provided a grant for the study to Careggi University Hospital. Dr. Ali reported having personal equity and fees from Shockwave Medical, as well as grants from other companies outside the scope of the study.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Di Mario C et al. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 25 doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008434.

SAN FRANCISCO – A postmarket analysis of the coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) system validated the safety and utility of the procedure first described in the Disrupt CAD I study.

“We now have an efficient technology to treat calcium that is safe to use, simple to learn, and able to achieve 100% success in delivering stents, with low final residual stenosis (7.8%),” Carlo Di Mario, MD, said in an interview in advance of the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting. “This was accomplished with a low rate of complications.”

Developed by Shockwave Medical, coronary IVL is an innovative lesion preparation tool designed to fracture challenging calcium using sonic pressure waves in order to facilitate stent delivery, deployment, and optimal expansion. In a feasibility study known as DISRUPT CAD I, Dr. Di Mario, director of structural interventional cardiology at Careggi University Hospital in Florence, Italy, and his colleagues performed the procedure in 60 patients (Circulation 2019;139:834-6). Clinical success, defined as residual stenosis of less than 50% post PCI with no evidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), was 95%, while device success, defined as successful delivery and IVL treatment at target lesion, reached 98.3%.

In an effort to ensure that results of DISRUPT CAD 1 were generalizable to a broader population, Dr. Di Mario and his colleagues enrolled 120 subjects at 15 sites in nine European countries into DISRUPT CAD II, a postmarket, single-arm study. They underwent vessel preparation for stent implantation with IVL, and the primary endpoint was in-hospital MACE, defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. The researchers also performed an optical coherence tomography (OCT) substudy to evaluate the mechanism of action of IVL and to quantify coronary artery calcium characteristics and calcium plaque fracture.

The mean age of the 120 patients was 72 years, 78% were male, 80% had hypertension, 72% had hyperlipidemia, 32% had diabetes, and 65% had class I or II angina. Most of the patients (94%) had severe calcification, with a mean lesion length of about 26 mm. The lesions were concentric in 70% of cases, and 30% had side-branch involvement.

Dr. Di Mario and his associates reported that IVL was delivered successfully in all cases. It also delivered stents successfully in all cases, with a high acute luminal gain (a mean of 1.7 mm²), and low residual stenosis (7.8%). The primary endpoint occurred in 5.8% of patients, consisting of seven non–Q-wave myocardial infarctions. The IVL mechanism of action was shown to be intraplaque calcium fracture, which occurred in about 80% of lesions analyzed by OCT.

“Based on my previous experience with IVL, I was confident that it could modify the calcium, but the results of the OCT substudy of the Disrupt CAD II utilizing OCT to evaluate the mechanism of action was clearly more positive than expected,” said Dr. Di Mario, who was a coprincipal investigator for the trial. “It demonstrated that IVL creates visible calcium fractures in the majority of cases and confirmed that full stent expansion secondary to the circumferential calcium modification is achievable, despite that nearly all the patients (94%) had severe coronary artery calcification. We know from previous work that full stent expansion is required to minimize complications and improve clinical outcomes, which was not always achievable before IVL.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it lacked a concurrent control group, “but it was run very carefully with complete monitoring of events and core lab and CEC [clinical endpoint committee] adjudication,” he said. “Also, the study was used to confirm short-term safety, and as such, did not include long term follow-up.”

In an interview at the meeting, Ajay J. Kirtane, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, called the findings “reassuring,” but said that he looks forward to results from the trial of the system currently under way in the United States known as the DISRUPT CAD III IDE Study. “The technology is accessible to many physicians because it’s a balloon-based technology,” he said. “Yet in terms of performance, we need to not only evaluate short-term outcomes, we need to see long-term outcomes as well, to make sure there are no untoward effects.”

Shockwave C² Coronary IVL catheters are commercially available for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease in Europe and other select countries; in the United States they are limited to investigational use within the DISRUPT CAD III IDE Study.

At the meeting, Ziad A. Ali, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Columbia University/New York–Presbyterian Hospital, presented results from Disrupt CAD II, and the content was published online at the time of presentation. The meeting was sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation. Dr. Di Mario disclosed that Shockwave Medical provided a grant for the study to Careggi University Hospital. Dr. Ali reported having personal equity and fees from Shockwave Medical, as well as grants from other companies outside the scope of the study.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Di Mario C et al. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 25 doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008434.

SAN FRANCISCO – Using the guidewire for rapid pacing of the left ventricle during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) instead of the usual approach – right ventricular pacing through a lead snaked up the femoral vein – significantly reduced procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and cost, without affecting efficacy or safety, in a 10-center randomized controlled trial in France.

Pacing using the 0.035-inch guidewire in the left ventricle eliminates “the need for a transvenous temporary pacing lead or additional venous access in most cases,”said investigators led by Benjamin Faurie, MD, an interventional cardiologist at the Cardiovascular Institute, Groupe Hospitalier Mutualiste, Grenoble, France. It simplifies TAVI “and should be considered as the default strategy for rapid ventricular pacing.”

“If risk factors for development of high-grade conduction disturbances are present, upfront RV [right ventricular] stimulation with a temporary pacing lead should be considered; otherwise LV [left ventricular] stimulation might be used.” LV stimulation in TAVI “is particularly attractive in patients with an indwelling permanent pacemaker to avoid the risk of pacemaker lead dislodgement with a temporary pacing lead,” they said.

“This technique may also be useful in transcatheter heart valve implantation in the mitral position and in transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions, where having a standard temporary pacing lead across the tricuspid valve may interfere with the procedure,” the investigators said.

Rapid ventricular pacing ensures cardiac standstill during TAVI, but the RV approach carries the risk of vascular complications and RV perforation. LV guidewire pacing, a technique borrowed from pediatric balloon aortic valvuloplasty, avoids the risks. The French study – dubbed Direct Left Ventricular Rapid Pacing Via the Valve Delivery Guide-wire in TAVI (EASY-TAVI) – is the first randomized trial to compare the technique with conventional RV stimulation, and it was published to coincide with a presentation at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting (JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.029).

The patients were undergoing transfemoral TAVI with a Sapien 3 valve (Edwards Lifesciences); 151 were randomized to LV stimulation through the guidewire, and 152 to RV stimulation through a temporary pacing lead.

Both procedure duration (48.4 minutes vs. 55.6 minutes) and fluoroscopy time (13.48 minutes vs. 14.6 minutes) were significantly shorter in the LV group than in the RV group. The procedure was also less costly (€18,807 vs. €19,437) because of shorter catheterization lab time and materials savings.

There were no significant difference between LV and RV groups in rates of effective stimulation (84.9% vs. 87.1%, respectively), procedural success (100% vs. 99.3%), 30-day TAVI-related major adverse cardiovascular events (13.9% vs. 17.1%), or permanent pacemaker implantation within 30 days (17.9% vs. 11.8%). There were two cases of cardiac tamponade in the RV group from the temporary lead; there were no guidewire related tamponades in the LV group.

Fourteen LV patients (9%) needed bailout with an RV lead because of new-onset left bundle branch block or atrioventricular block. The temporary pacing lead, meanwhile, was left in place in 38 RV patients (25%), which suggests “a lower threshold for an indwelling temporary pacing lead post procedure when there is already one in place,” the investigators said.

To deliver LV stimulation, the cathode of an external pacemaker was attached to the distal external end of the guidewire using a crocodile clip. A second crocodile clip – the anode – was attached to the incised skin at the sheath insertion site in the groin. The valve delivery system provided the required insulation.

The investigators noted that “the benefit of LV-stimulation may be less with self-expanding valves due to the significantly higher incidence of conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker implantation post procedure.”

Patients were a mean age of 83 years, with about equal numbers of men and women. They had an intermediate risk of dying during the procedure. “However, we feel that the results are generalizable to the classical patient at high predicted risk of surgical mortality undergoing TAVI. Such patients tend to have higher rates of comorbidities, including peripheral vascular disease, placing them at higher risk of vascular complications and tend to have thinner RV walls, placing them at higher risk of RV-perforation,” the investigators said.

The work was funded by Edwards Lifesciences and others. Dr. Faurie had no disclosures. The senior author is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Faurie B et al. TCT 2019. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.029.

SAN FRANCISCO – Using the guidewire for rapid pacing of the left ventricle during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) instead of the usual approach – right ventricular pacing through a lead snaked up the femoral vein – significantly reduced procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and cost, without affecting efficacy or safety, in a 10-center randomized controlled trial in France.

Pacing using the 0.035-inch guidewire in the left ventricle eliminates “the need for a transvenous temporary pacing lead or additional venous access in most cases,”said investigators led by Benjamin Faurie, MD, an interventional cardiologist at the Cardiovascular Institute, Groupe Hospitalier Mutualiste, Grenoble, France. It simplifies TAVI “and should be considered as the default strategy for rapid ventricular pacing.”

“If risk factors for development of high-grade conduction disturbances are present, upfront RV [right ventricular] stimulation with a temporary pacing lead should be considered; otherwise LV [left ventricular] stimulation might be used.” LV stimulation in TAVI “is particularly attractive in patients with an indwelling permanent pacemaker to avoid the risk of pacemaker lead dislodgement with a temporary pacing lead,” they said.

“This technique may also be useful in transcatheter heart valve implantation in the mitral position and in transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions, where having a standard temporary pacing lead across the tricuspid valve may interfere with the procedure,” the investigators said.

Rapid ventricular pacing ensures cardiac standstill during TAVI, but the RV approach carries the risk of vascular complications and RV perforation. LV guidewire pacing, a technique borrowed from pediatric balloon aortic valvuloplasty, avoids the risks. The French study – dubbed Direct Left Ventricular Rapid Pacing Via the Valve Delivery Guide-wire in TAVI (EASY-TAVI) – is the first randomized trial to compare the technique with conventional RV stimulation, and it was published to coincide with a presentation at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting (JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.029).

The patients were undergoing transfemoral TAVI with a Sapien 3 valve (Edwards Lifesciences); 151 were randomized to LV stimulation through the guidewire, and 152 to RV stimulation through a temporary pacing lead.

Both procedure duration (48.4 minutes vs. 55.6 minutes) and fluoroscopy time (13.48 minutes vs. 14.6 minutes) were significantly shorter in the LV group than in the RV group. The procedure was also less costly (€18,807 vs. €19,437) because of shorter catheterization lab time and materials savings.

There were no significant difference between LV and RV groups in rates of effective stimulation (84.9% vs. 87.1%, respectively), procedural success (100% vs. 99.3%), 30-day TAVI-related major adverse cardiovascular events (13.9% vs. 17.1%), or permanent pacemaker implantation within 30 days (17.9% vs. 11.8%). There were two cases of cardiac tamponade in the RV group from the temporary lead; there were no guidewire related tamponades in the LV group.

Fourteen LV patients (9%) needed bailout with an RV lead because of new-onset left bundle branch block or atrioventricular block. The temporary pacing lead, meanwhile, was left in place in 38 RV patients (25%), which suggests “a lower threshold for an indwelling temporary pacing lead post procedure when there is already one in place,” the investigators said.

To deliver LV stimulation, the cathode of an external pacemaker was attached to the distal external end of the guidewire using a crocodile clip. A second crocodile clip – the anode – was attached to the incised skin at the sheath insertion site in the groin. The valve delivery system provided the required insulation.

The investigators noted that “the benefit of LV-stimulation may be less with self-expanding valves due to the significantly higher incidence of conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker implantation post procedure.”

Patients were a mean age of 83 years, with about equal numbers of men and women. They had an intermediate risk of dying during the procedure. “However, we feel that the results are generalizable to the classical patient at high predicted risk of surgical mortality undergoing TAVI. Such patients tend to have higher rates of comorbidities, including peripheral vascular disease, placing them at higher risk of vascular complications and tend to have thinner RV walls, placing them at higher risk of RV-perforation,” the investigators said.

The work was funded by Edwards Lifesciences and others. Dr. Faurie had no disclosures. The senior author is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Faurie B et al. TCT 2019. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.029.

SAN FRANCISCO – Using the guidewire for rapid pacing of the left ventricle during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) instead of the usual approach – right ventricular pacing through a lead snaked up the femoral vein – significantly reduced procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and cost, without affecting efficacy or safety, in a 10-center randomized controlled trial in France.

Pacing using the 0.035-inch guidewire in the left ventricle eliminates “the need for a transvenous temporary pacing lead or additional venous access in most cases,”said investigators led by Benjamin Faurie, MD, an interventional cardiologist at the Cardiovascular Institute, Groupe Hospitalier Mutualiste, Grenoble, France. It simplifies TAVI “and should be considered as the default strategy for rapid ventricular pacing.”

“If risk factors for development of high-grade conduction disturbances are present, upfront RV [right ventricular] stimulation with a temporary pacing lead should be considered; otherwise LV [left ventricular] stimulation might be used.” LV stimulation in TAVI “is particularly attractive in patients with an indwelling permanent pacemaker to avoid the risk of pacemaker lead dislodgement with a temporary pacing lead,” they said.

“This technique may also be useful in transcatheter heart valve implantation in the mitral position and in transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions, where having a standard temporary pacing lead across the tricuspid valve may interfere with the procedure,” the investigators said.

Rapid ventricular pacing ensures cardiac standstill during TAVI, but the RV approach carries the risk of vascular complications and RV perforation. LV guidewire pacing, a technique borrowed from pediatric balloon aortic valvuloplasty, avoids the risks. The French study – dubbed Direct Left Ventricular Rapid Pacing Via the Valve Delivery Guide-wire in TAVI (EASY-TAVI) – is the first randomized trial to compare the technique with conventional RV stimulation, and it was published to coincide with a presentation at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting (JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.029).

The patients were undergoing transfemoral TAVI with a Sapien 3 valve (Edwards Lifesciences); 151 were randomized to LV stimulation through the guidewire, and 152 to RV stimulation through a temporary pacing lead.

Both procedure duration (48.4 minutes vs. 55.6 minutes) and fluoroscopy time (13.48 minutes vs. 14.6 minutes) were significantly shorter in the LV group than in the RV group. The procedure was also less costly (€18,807 vs. €19,437) because of shorter catheterization lab time and materials savings.

There were no significant difference between LV and RV groups in rates of effective stimulation (84.9% vs. 87.1%, respectively), procedural success (100% vs. 99.3%), 30-day TAVI-related major adverse cardiovascular events (13.9% vs. 17.1%), or permanent pacemaker implantation within 30 days (17.9% vs. 11.8%). There were two cases of cardiac tamponade in the RV group from the temporary lead; there were no guidewire related tamponades in the LV group.

Fourteen LV patients (9%) needed bailout with an RV lead because of new-onset left bundle branch block or atrioventricular block. The temporary pacing lead, meanwhile, was left in place in 38 RV patients (25%), which suggests “a lower threshold for an indwelling temporary pacing lead post procedure when there is already one in place,” the investigators said.

To deliver LV stimulation, the cathode of an external pacemaker was attached to the distal external end of the guidewire using a crocodile clip. A second crocodile clip – the anode – was attached to the incised skin at the sheath insertion site in the groin. The valve delivery system provided the required insulation.

The investigators noted that “the benefit of LV-stimulation may be less with self-expanding valves due to the significantly higher incidence of conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker implantation post procedure.”

Patients were a mean age of 83 years, with about equal numbers of men and women. They had an intermediate risk of dying during the procedure. “However, we feel that the results are generalizable to the classical patient at high predicted risk of surgical mortality undergoing TAVI. Such patients tend to have higher rates of comorbidities, including peripheral vascular disease, placing them at higher risk of vascular complications and tend to have thinner RV walls, placing them at higher risk of RV-perforation,” the investigators said.

The work was funded by Edwards Lifesciences and others. Dr. Faurie had no disclosures. The senior author is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences

aotto@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Faurie B et al. TCT 2019. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Sep 14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.029.

SAN FRANCISCO – Anticoagulation with apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin provides superior safety and similar efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation who have an acute coronary syndrome, compared with regimens that include vitamin K antagonists, aspirin, or both.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

The findings come from a prespecified analysis of data from the AUGUSTUS trial presented by Stephan Windecker, MD, at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting.

“This study adds very important information [to the notion] that triple therapy in the setting of atrial fibrillation and PCI [percutaneous coronary intervention] is really not the way to go,” Ori Ben-Yehuda, MD, FACC, executive director of the Cardiovascular Research Foundation’s Clinical Trials Center, said during a media briefing.

In the recent multicenter AUGUSTUS trial, Dr. Windecker, of the department of cardiology at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland, and colleagues found that among 4,614 patients with atrial fibrillation and a recent acute coronary syndrome or PCI treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor, apixaban without aspirin resulted in less bleeding, fewer hospitalizations, and no significant differences in ischemic events compared with regimens that included a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), aspirin, or both (N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1509-24). For this prespecified analysis, the researchers used a 2×2 factorial design to compare apixaban with VKA and aspirin with placebo in the AUGUSTUS trial participants with ACS treated medically (group 1; 1,097 patients, or 24%), those with ACS treated with PCI (group 2; 1,714 patients, or 37%), and those undergoing elective PCI (group 3; 1,784 patients, or 39%). The outcomes of interest were bleeding, death, and hospitalization as well as death and ischemic events by antithrombotic strategy in the study participants. This marks the only trial in the field that included patients with ACS managed medically, Dr. Windecker said.

At baseline, the median age of patients was 71 years, 30% were female, 36% had diabetes, and 45% had heart failure. Patients managed medically were younger (a median age of 70) and more frequently female; 57% presented with heart failure. The groups had identical CHA2DS2VASc scores (4), and very similar HAS-BLED scores (2 in groups 1 and 2, and 3 in group 3).

Apixaban compared with VKA showed lower International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis–defined major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding among patients in group 1 (HR, 0.44), group 2 (HR, 0.68), and group 3 (HR, 0.82) (P for interaction = .052). Apixaban compared with VKA reduced death or hospitalization among patients in group 1 (HR, 0.71), group 2 (HR 0.88), and group 3 (HR, 0.87) (P for interaction = .345). Compared with VKA, apixaban resulted in a similar effect on death and ischemic events among patients in all three treatment groups (P for interaction = .356).

Compared with placebo, aspirin had a higher rate of bleeding among patients in group 1 (HR, 1.49), group 2 (HR, 2.02) and group 3 (HR, 1.91) (P for interaction = .479). For the same comparison, there was no difference in outcomes among the three groups for the composite of death or hospitalization and death and ischemic events.

“The overall results of the AUGUSTUS trial are consistent across the three clinically important subgroups,” Dr. Windecker said. The reasons why patients received medical therapy remain unclear, “because it was at the physician’s discretion as to whether they were treated medically or underwent PCI,” he said. “The proportion very much reflects our clinical practice, where 20%-25% of patients are treated medically. What was surprising for me is that I would have anticipated there would be more elderly patients with comorbidities, but I did anticipate that there would be more female patients (in this subgroup).”

Robert A. Harrington, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Stanford (Calif.) University who served on the Data Safety and Monitoring Board for the trial, noted that the patients with atrial fibrillation represent 7%-10% of all ACS patients, “so it’s a big population,” he said. “What’s been disappointing is that none of the trials have been big enough to uncouple the bleeding vs. ischemic issue. We don’t know the answer for how long do you need the triple therapy versus when you can switch to the double therapy.”

Dr. Windecker said that the optimal duration of short-term aspirin remains unclear in this patient population. “Whether there is a benefit of giving aspirin for 2 weeks or 4 weeks remains unanswered,” he said. “Triple therapy is not the way to go, but we need to fine-tune, and probably individualize, which patients may benefit from a certain duration of aspirin.”

The study results were published online at the time of presentation (Circulation 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043308.

AUGUSTUS was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Inc. Dr. Windecker reported having received institutional research and educational grants to Bern University Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, BMS, CSL Behring, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Polares, and Sinomed. His coauthors reported having numerous financial ties to the pharmaceutical and device industries.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Windecker S. TCT 2019, Late-Breaking Trials 1 session.

SAN FRANCISCO – Anticoagulation with apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin provides superior safety and similar efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation who have an acute coronary syndrome, compared with regimens that include vitamin K antagonists, aspirin, or both.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

The findings come from a prespecified analysis of data from the AUGUSTUS trial presented by Stephan Windecker, MD, at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting.

“This study adds very important information [to the notion] that triple therapy in the setting of atrial fibrillation and PCI [percutaneous coronary intervention] is really not the way to go,” Ori Ben-Yehuda, MD, FACC, executive director of the Cardiovascular Research Foundation’s Clinical Trials Center, said during a media briefing.

In the recent multicenter AUGUSTUS trial, Dr. Windecker, of the department of cardiology at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland, and colleagues found that among 4,614 patients with atrial fibrillation and a recent acute coronary syndrome or PCI treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor, apixaban without aspirin resulted in less bleeding, fewer hospitalizations, and no significant differences in ischemic events compared with regimens that included a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), aspirin, or both (N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1509-24). For this prespecified analysis, the researchers used a 2×2 factorial design to compare apixaban with VKA and aspirin with placebo in the AUGUSTUS trial participants with ACS treated medically (group 1; 1,097 patients, or 24%), those with ACS treated with PCI (group 2; 1,714 patients, or 37%), and those undergoing elective PCI (group 3; 1,784 patients, or 39%). The outcomes of interest were bleeding, death, and hospitalization as well as death and ischemic events by antithrombotic strategy in the study participants. This marks the only trial in the field that included patients with ACS managed medically, Dr. Windecker said.

At baseline, the median age of patients was 71 years, 30% were female, 36% had diabetes, and 45% had heart failure. Patients managed medically were younger (a median age of 70) and more frequently female; 57% presented with heart failure. The groups had identical CHA2DS2VASc scores (4), and very similar HAS-BLED scores (2 in groups 1 and 2, and 3 in group 3).

Apixaban compared with VKA showed lower International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis–defined major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding among patients in group 1 (HR, 0.44), group 2 (HR, 0.68), and group 3 (HR, 0.82) (P for interaction = .052). Apixaban compared with VKA reduced death or hospitalization among patients in group 1 (HR, 0.71), group 2 (HR 0.88), and group 3 (HR, 0.87) (P for interaction = .345). Compared with VKA, apixaban resulted in a similar effect on death and ischemic events among patients in all three treatment groups (P for interaction = .356).

Compared with placebo, aspirin had a higher rate of bleeding among patients in group 1 (HR, 1.49), group 2 (HR, 2.02) and group 3 (HR, 1.91) (P for interaction = .479). For the same comparison, there was no difference in outcomes among the three groups for the composite of death or hospitalization and death and ischemic events.

“The overall results of the AUGUSTUS trial are consistent across the three clinically important subgroups,” Dr. Windecker said. The reasons why patients received medical therapy remain unclear, “because it was at the physician’s discretion as to whether they were treated medically or underwent PCI,” he said. “The proportion very much reflects our clinical practice, where 20%-25% of patients are treated medically. What was surprising for me is that I would have anticipated there would be more elderly patients with comorbidities, but I did anticipate that there would be more female patients (in this subgroup).”

Robert A. Harrington, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Stanford (Calif.) University who served on the Data Safety and Monitoring Board for the trial, noted that the patients with atrial fibrillation represent 7%-10% of all ACS patients, “so it’s a big population,” he said. “What’s been disappointing is that none of the trials have been big enough to uncouple the bleeding vs. ischemic issue. We don’t know the answer for how long do you need the triple therapy versus when you can switch to the double therapy.”

Dr. Windecker said that the optimal duration of short-term aspirin remains unclear in this patient population. “Whether there is a benefit of giving aspirin for 2 weeks or 4 weeks remains unanswered,” he said. “Triple therapy is not the way to go, but we need to fine-tune, and probably individualize, which patients may benefit from a certain duration of aspirin.”

The study results were published online at the time of presentation (Circulation 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043308.

AUGUSTUS was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Inc. Dr. Windecker reported having received institutional research and educational grants to Bern University Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, BMS, CSL Behring, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Polares, and Sinomed. His coauthors reported having numerous financial ties to the pharmaceutical and device industries.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Windecker S. TCT 2019, Late-Breaking Trials 1 session.

SAN FRANCISCO – Anticoagulation with apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin provides superior safety and similar efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation who have an acute coronary syndrome, compared with regimens that include vitamin K antagonists, aspirin, or both.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

The findings come from a prespecified analysis of data from the AUGUSTUS trial presented by Stephan Windecker, MD, at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual meeting.

“This study adds very important information [to the notion] that triple therapy in the setting of atrial fibrillation and PCI [percutaneous coronary intervention] is really not the way to go,” Ori Ben-Yehuda, MD, FACC, executive director of the Cardiovascular Research Foundation’s Clinical Trials Center, said during a media briefing.

In the recent multicenter AUGUSTUS trial, Dr. Windecker, of the department of cardiology at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland, and colleagues found that among 4,614 patients with atrial fibrillation and a recent acute coronary syndrome or PCI treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor, apixaban without aspirin resulted in less bleeding, fewer hospitalizations, and no significant differences in ischemic events compared with regimens that included a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), aspirin, or both (N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1509-24). For this prespecified analysis, the researchers used a 2×2 factorial design to compare apixaban with VKA and aspirin with placebo in the AUGUSTUS trial participants with ACS treated medically (group 1; 1,097 patients, or 24%), those with ACS treated with PCI (group 2; 1,714 patients, or 37%), and those undergoing elective PCI (group 3; 1,784 patients, or 39%). The outcomes of interest were bleeding, death, and hospitalization as well as death and ischemic events by antithrombotic strategy in the study participants. This marks the only trial in the field that included patients with ACS managed medically, Dr. Windecker said.

At baseline, the median age of patients was 71 years, 30% were female, 36% had diabetes, and 45% had heart failure. Patients managed medically were younger (a median age of 70) and more frequently female; 57% presented with heart failure. The groups had identical CHA2DS2VASc scores (4), and very similar HAS-BLED scores (2 in groups 1 and 2, and 3 in group 3).

Apixaban compared with VKA showed lower International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis–defined major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding among patients in group 1 (HR, 0.44), group 2 (HR, 0.68), and group 3 (HR, 0.82) (P for interaction = .052). Apixaban compared with VKA reduced death or hospitalization among patients in group 1 (HR, 0.71), group 2 (HR 0.88), and group 3 (HR, 0.87) (P for interaction = .345). Compared with VKA, apixaban resulted in a similar effect on death and ischemic events among patients in all three treatment groups (P for interaction = .356).

Compared with placebo, aspirin had a higher rate of bleeding among patients in group 1 (HR, 1.49), group 2 (HR, 2.02) and group 3 (HR, 1.91) (P for interaction = .479). For the same comparison, there was no difference in outcomes among the three groups for the composite of death or hospitalization and death and ischemic events.

“The overall results of the AUGUSTUS trial are consistent across the three clinically important subgroups,” Dr. Windecker said. The reasons why patients received medical therapy remain unclear, “because it was at the physician’s discretion as to whether they were treated medically or underwent PCI,” he said. “The proportion very much reflects our clinical practice, where 20%-25% of patients are treated medically. What was surprising for me is that I would have anticipated there would be more elderly patients with comorbidities, but I did anticipate that there would be more female patients (in this subgroup).”

Robert A. Harrington, MD, an interventional cardiologist at Stanford (Calif.) University who served on the Data Safety and Monitoring Board for the trial, noted that the patients with atrial fibrillation represent 7%-10% of all ACS patients, “so it’s a big population,” he said. “What’s been disappointing is that none of the trials have been big enough to uncouple the bleeding vs. ischemic issue. We don’t know the answer for how long do you need the triple therapy versus when you can switch to the double therapy.”

Dr. Windecker said that the optimal duration of short-term aspirin remains unclear in this patient population. “Whether there is a benefit of giving aspirin for 2 weeks or 4 weeks remains unanswered,” he said. “Triple therapy is not the way to go, but we need to fine-tune, and probably individualize, which patients may benefit from a certain duration of aspirin.”

The study results were published online at the time of presentation (Circulation 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043308.

AUGUSTUS was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Inc. Dr. Windecker reported having received institutional research and educational grants to Bern University Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, BMS, CSL Behring, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Polares, and Sinomed. His coauthors reported having numerous financial ties to the pharmaceutical and device industries.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Windecker S. TCT 2019, Late-Breaking Trials 1 session.